Could this explain Einstein's theory of the fabric of space? Just thinking based upon how it was explained to me as a ball on a bed sheet it creates
a slight curve in turn the object when traveling away it would be going uphill possibly changing the course of motion?

Some of the entries on this thread reminds me of how it is difficult to accept how ignorant we are, and how we lost our humility regarding what we
call nature and how we try to discount these observations with denial that nature is far more powerful i,e, having the ability to cause change than
humans.

"There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio,
Than are dreamt of in your philosophy".
- Hamlet (1.5.166-7), Hamlet to Horatio. Shakespeare.
The emphasis here should be on "dreamt of", as Hamlet is pointing out how little even the most educated people can explain. www.shakespeare-online.com...

2. "Why are we walking around like ants if all of this stuff exists" - John Lear www.youtube.com...
I think that John Lear said that even the planets of the solar sytem are habitable in one of the Youtube interviews possibly on Cost-to-Coast radio.
Mr Lear says that human inter-planetary travel has already occurred. Either he is telling the truth or lying.

Yes. It was discovered by Nasa in the eighties. Then disavowed. I won't say much else. Just take a picture of the sun this evening. Use your cell.
Give a look to the left of the sun. I know, I know, it's lens glare, right. OK, try it through polarized lenses. Cheat and put your ray bans over the
lens, that should work. Uh oh, still there? Remember all those reports about the you know what coming from the south of the sun? If you're in the
states, south of the sun would be down and left of the sun, not completely under it. But that's just crazy, because the gummint would tell us about
something like that, huh. That Mayan calander thing, that's just nuts, right? Same with the Sumerians, right? Yeah. It's a "new force of nature",
allright. Actually, it's a very old force of nature. You know Nasa is full of crap when they start making video's to disavow rumors. Nothing to see
here, pay no attention to that man behind the curtain.

Originally posted by Zgrace226
Could this explain Einstein's theory of the fabric of space? Just thinking based upon how it was explained to me as a ball on a bed sheet it creates a
slight curve in turn the object when traveling away it would be going uphill possibly changing the course of motion?

Exactly. This is just a good way to find out how to measure the depression of the Sun.

Which is FASCINATING. If the probe is slowing down, the rate should let one measure how deep the depression is. It might help indicate what the
"neutral " area outside of that range is. What is space without gravity? Does the effect of "Falling" into our well increase the speed of particles?
And if so, by how much. How warped is our fish bowl? Does it speed up photons?

How hard is it to get out of our solar system? How much power do you need to climb out?

Originally posted by Phage
In that case the Pioneer spacecraft should not be slowing down more than expected as they get further from the Sun, should they?

Phage,

The magnetic force from the Sun was probably helping the Pioneer move in the first place. That means, the further away it travels from the Sun, the
less help it will get to help move it. So it would slow down.

So it was going faster than it should have been early on?
Interesting. I hadn't heard about that.

It probably wasn't going exactly the speed they expected. It was probably traveling + or - what they expected, and the magnetic force was so weak
that it fell within that + or - and they didn't think much about it.

Originally posted by Phage
The "magnetic force" of the Sun is repelling it? Why do we need rockets and stuff?

Well the magnetic force from the Sun was probably inducing a small magnetic force in the satellite. The heat from the Sun was probably making the part
of the satellite facing the Sun a much weaker magnet than the other colder side. This could have created just the perfect magnetic force in the
satellite which would repel from the Sun.

When the Sun first "ignited" it was perhaps a massive explosive force. Particles, gases and objects "pushed out" may not have "escape velocity"
for the Solar System.

The "force" bringing objects back in, is gravity. If there is a "turning" -- it might be a magnetosphere -- or perhaps particles NOT in the
"wake" of the solar system, suggesting a "galactic wind" in opposition to the "solar wind."

My own theory that is NOT conventional, would be "gravity streams" like a current in an ocean. But gravity tends to "avoid normal matter" so it's
really a "flow of space itself." Which has motion without adding acceleration (which should be measurable). This is the same Phenomena of gravity
which I think explains how Galaxies appear Heavier than their stars can account for.

>> Really, the theory of "Dark Matter" is predicated on the fact that galaxies spin faster and should be throwing out stars more than they are -- so
the "dark matter" adds gravity without interacting. My point is that gravity is stronger than theorized, but it also "pushes outward." So matter
is more influenced by gravity -- but does NOT collapse -- very much like the strong and weak nuclear forces that keep atoms from collapsing on our
planet but holding together as objects.

Just as matter tends to crystalize or "have flaws" -- space/time itself SHOULD have areas of lower energy and concentrations that optimize energy
usage (conservation of energy). So anything moving along these gravity streams will move faster, or lose speed. This could be SEEN by watching nebula
and witnessing unexplained "jets" of matter.

Black Holes exhibit this phenomena; Astronomers cannot account for some "plasma jets" that seem to defy the Speed of Light limit. Which they are
not; but space is getting compressed and allowing for matter to travel faster -- conserving Light Speed limits within the black holes as both MATTER
and the MOTION of the black hole, can push relativistic limits. The HOLE, in a black hole -- is made BECAUSE the matter is so dense, that merely
SITTING THERE, the acceleration reaches relativistic speeds and causes a particle to expand -- and it conserves energy if ONE particle pushes past
relativity than all of them -- so a stream of matter achieves "Universal Escape Velocity" -- which opens a hole in space time, forcing the matter
out of "space". Which is what we see when particles are accelerated in a particle accelerator -- they gain mass. But unlike Einstein's inflation
theory -- I think this is due to the particles being in a PAST STATE of time. Gravity is the same thing as acceleration in terms of time -- but the
latter aspect involves MOTION in space. Which, to my mind -- means that the expression of "gravity" inside the object is retarded.

So there must be a condition, where SPACE gets compressed, but no gravity and acceleration is changed -- an interstellar "conduit." And again, the
analogy of an Ocean Current comes to mind - although we don't see the "water" that carries waves with Space/Time -- we can only witness it's
effects on light because we CANNOT see or interact with gravity.

Anyway, a lot of my theory explains other parts; I think there is a limit to how much matter can be in a given area. The fast spinning of very massive
black holes is due to conservation of "relativity." I think that SPACE itself is a medium, but is in separate dimensional state.

I have not had a chance to read all of the replies but I did see Phage had shown up so I understood where the conversation was at that point. Please,
pardon me if this has been covered.

Since the data seems to indicate that all of these probes are falling into Sun, I suspect it is like van der Waals force that is just from our Solar
System as a whole. IF HOWEVER, the data is not sharing with us the exact direction of the vertices of these probes we cannot conclude that the center
is the true source and it becomes open to wild speculation until more data is revealed to correct that hole in our understanding. So I will assume
that each are "falling" back to Sol for the sake of this discussion.

These van der Waals forces are understood to be the affect, like gravity, of one object on another and I am extrapolating that this idea will be about
a place just past the boundary of our Sun's direct affect on all objects with any mass. It is in fact a lesser force compared to electromagnetic
affect one might see on one element with another in a molecule. Since we have dipoles, points with (positive) protons and points with (negative)
electrons like Earth's North or South Poles that are observable in our Solar System producing some kind of electrical field, I suspect that it is
like a molecule and that there exists a van der Waals affect for any solar system. One that could be measured when an object is outside of the
electromagnetic affect and the gravitational pull of the primary gravity source, in our case Sol. Some would say how can I assume that when I have
described an electomagnetic field exist? Easy, the affect is observable in molecules with electron clouds and we can take our Solar System as a model
of a set of huge molecules. The planets look like Electron's and the Sun the nucleous to me anyway.

For those seeking Nibiru, I truly doubt any rogue planet X Y or Z could be the source based on the data presented even if I might like to believe it
ever existed. The probes are too far apart to exhibit a force going toward the Sun without that source being either the center of the solar system or
something very near the center at all times. Most of us realize that Sol occupies that place and only Mercury is close by. Thus, it must be related to
the Sun and could be a lesser force, i.e. van der Waals, at the edge of the mass/gravity affect of our system.

I'm thinking that it can't be any "force" from the Sun itself. If such a force existed, and could act on probes far outside our own solar system, then
it would be more noticable than gravity within the solar system. I think it far more likely that the probes have encountered a patch of dark matter.
Dark matter (correct me if I'm wrong) is hypothetically heavier than normal matter, and would thus slow the probes forward motion. Almost like if you
were running at full speed, and suddenly hit a thigh-deep pool of water. Still an amazing possability though, as we have yet to actually discover Dark
Matter.

Another possibility is that the probes passed close enough to a _____ (take your pick..Gas Giant, Star, Black Hole etc), and we are seeing the effects
of that gravitational pull. This (I think) is most likely. Their trajectory will probably alter soon enough as they begin to orbit the new source of
gravity...or if they were unforunate and passed too close to the black hole, then we will soon realize that our probes have been crushed into
something as small as an atom.

However, I do not see how our sun could be affecting something so far away. It would defy the Laws of Physics...and then it would be back to the old
drawing board.

Originally posted by Phage
In that case the Pioneer spacecraft should not be slowing down more than expected as they get further from the Sun, should they?

Phage,

The magnetic force from the Sun was probably helping the Pioneer move in the first place. That means, the further away it travels from the Sun, the
less help it will get to help move it. So it would slow down.

edit on 20-9-2010 by illumin8ed because: edit quote tags

A magnetic force might also TURN the Satellite: Very rarely, in our rocket-propelled space travel, do astronauts and satellites follow a straight path
-- they use the gravity of planets to sling-shot themselves along a course. The magnetic force of the sun would tend to draw a metallic object either
towards the magnetic field or ALONG an elliptical path.

But it's kind of the same difference; perhaps the magnetic field was boosting the satellite and now it's weaker -- it would APPEAR to boost it in an
outward trajectory only if the path's coincided with the orbital escape path.

If there is a solar wind or magnetic field assisting, it's going to get weaker as the satellite moves out into space. Gravity will also be pulling
less on it.

>> However, there could be a "galactic wind" pushing back on it once it gets out of the solar system. But there are a number of conventional and
non-conventional theories that we could suggest for the phenomena.

what the 9112 was orbiting the sun ?
where did the graphs come from and do you realize what you are infering?
how almighty would it be to alter the dinamics of the sun
i am stunned how come i have not heard of this before?

phage

have you seen this video and can you verify the graphs
i cant find anything to debunk this
if this is true then our solar system is a the whim of planet building super aliens
please ..............?

The "giant spaceships around the sun" have been discussed and discussed. There are no giant spaceships around the sun, there are compression
artifacts which appear in the preliminary "beacon mode" images from the STEREO spacecraft.

thanks for that
i couldnt understand how these things could be there without someone
knowing what was going on
i think that was added to confuse the situation
THANKS
my mind can continue with the baseless speculation it likes without planet building aliens

This content community relies on user-generated content from our member contributors. The opinions of our members are not those of site ownership who maintains strict editorial agnosticism and simply provides a collaborative venue for free expression.